Immigration implications on Russian society

As Sa'iqa wrote:In Sweden roughly 75% of all rapes are committed by migrants from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia etc.

Can anyone name a single western country in which massive influx of people from such places has not been accompanied by severe social strain? Is there a single country affected to a similar degree by Chinese or Vietnamese immigration?

Yes, that's precisely the point . These bloody Asians & Africans should be kicked back to their own countries .

Ok late here in the UK I hear Hindoos call themselves British Indians , Chinese call themselves British Chinese . I mean WTF ...whoever told you guys you are Brits ? Just a bunch of scumbags from India , China and other such shit hole countries who have taken over the whole of Europe .

British Chinese men and women also rank very highly in terms of receiving wages well above the national median but are less likely to receive a higher net weekly income than any other ethnic group. British Chinese men earn the highest median wage for any ethnic group with £12.70 earned per hour, followed by the medians for White British men at £11.40, and Multiracial Britons at £11.30 and British Indian men at £11.20. British Chinese women also earn the highest median wage for any ethnic group third only to Black Caribbean women and Multiracial Briton women with a median wage of £10.21 earned per hour.

If I had to choose between accepting immigrants from the Middle East/Africa/Central Asia and East Asia (China, Vietnam, Korea etc.) - I would chose East Asia. East Asians are a productive members of society and their immigration isn't associated with massive surge in crime rates.

As Sa'iqa wrote:If I had to choose between accepting immigrants from the Middle East/Africa/Central Asia and East Asia (China, Vietnam, Korea etc.) - I would chose East Asia. East Asians are a productive members of society and their immigration isn't associated with massive surge in crime rates.

Why not SEAsians? Filipinos are good at household chores, cooking, doing the dishes, scrubbing toilets its built-in.

@Deep Throat:You cannot even interpret the data you provide. Whites commit the most crimes because they are by far the largest group in the UK.

Besides, the article states clearly that:• Proportionally, blacks in England and Wales commit significantly more violent crimes – of all kinds – than whites• Blacks are 6.6 times more likely than whites to commit murder• Blacks are 7.3 times more likely than whites to commit firearms offences• Blacks are 3.7 times more likely than whites to commit rape• Blacks commit over a quarter of robberies in England and Wales, despite being only 3.3% of the population.

They are over 12 times more likely than whites to commit robbery• Proportionally, Asians commit marginally more violent crime than whites.

They are more likely to commit murder, rape and robbery, and less likely to possess firearms, blades, or steal from a person

HOWEVER - note that in the article the term "Asian British" is used in reference to people from places like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. It excludes people from China and Arab countries.

As Sa'iqa wrote:@Deep Throat:You cannot even interpret the data you provide.

Cannot interpret it to your liking ... YES .....agreed .

As Sa'iqa wrote:Whites commit the most crimes because they are by far the largest group in the UK.

But according to you/ your previous posts Blacks and Asians are the real criminals .

As Sa'iqa wrote:Besides, the article states clearly that:• Proportionally, blacks in England and Wales commit significantly more violent crimes – of all kinds – than whites• Blacks are 6.6 times more likely than whites to commit murder• Blacks are 7.3 times more likely than whites to commit firearms offences• Blacks are 3.7 times more likely than whites to commit rape• Blacks commit over a quarter of robberies in England and Wales, despite being only 3.3% of the population.

A majority of Forum members are "6.6 times more likely" to post a more substantial comment than you . So if they don't , it doesn't make you more of a genius .

Blacks are more likely to commit a crime . More Likely doesn't mean they have committed a crime .

As Sa'iqa wrote:HOWEVER - note that in the article the term "Asian British" is used in reference to people from places like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. It excludes people from China and Arab countries.

That's part of the picture . That's why I provided the other link to prove that Poles are a bigger threat in the UK than most other races.

But according to you/ your previous posts Blacks and Asians are the real criminals

They are because number of jailed people as a % of population is higher in these groups. A similar situation exists in the US where Blacks constitute 12% of total US population but 50% of prison population - which means that they are far more likely to harm you than any white person... you'd better not hang out in Black neighborhoods at night.

Blacks are more likely to commit a crime . More Likely doesn't mean they have committed a crime .

Of course the statistics aren't true in absolute terms - you cannot be sure if any person has committed a crime just by knowing they're Black. But it doesn't change the fact that a % of people who killed someone is 6x higher in Black population than in white one.

An incredible anecdote: In a 3-year period in the US, there were 9,000 cases of group Black on White sexual assaults – about 10 per day. In that same 3-year period, Whites, with a 4.5 times greater population, committed exactly zero group sexual assaults on Blacks. That figure alone is simply stunning.

Last edited by As Sa'iqa on Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:45 pm; edited 1 time in total

As Sa'iqa wrote:They are because number of jailed people as a % of population is higher in these groups. A similar situation exists in the US where Blacks constitute 12% of total US population but 50% of prison population - which means that they are far more likely to harm you than any white person... you'd better not hang out in Black neighborhoods at night.

This issue has been discussed so many times , in so many forums that there is hardly anything new that can be added .

Blacks in the US are economically at the bottom of the ladder . Their ability to hire a decent lawyer is Zilch . The same applies to economically weak Whites as well .

As Sa'iqa wrote:you'd better not hang out in Black neighborhoods at night.

You need to get your facts right . Blacks are generally mugged/killed by their own kind in gang related violence. Ergo, the chances of being mugged/killed by a Black is higher if you are Black yourself .

As Sa'iqa wrote:But it doesn't change the fact that a % of people who killed someone is 6x higher in Black population than in white one.

It only highlights the fact that those killed were also Blacks . Fact is that in de facto segregated neighborhood the chances of getting killed by someone who is not from your race hardly exists .

Asian - as in those people who come to Russia from Middle East , India , China , CIS . 99% of them are illegal.

GarryB wrote:The article suggests the attacker was a migrant... it says nothing about his ethnicity or even that he was ilegal... what makes you think the attacker wasn't a white european?

Russian TV stations have reported that the person arrested by Moscow police was an Asian . Was this video .

http://rt.com/news/moscow-nationalists-killing-violence-142/

GarryB wrote:Does rape not occur in Europe?

White men hardly rape in Europe . The cases of rape in UK and US pales into insignificance when you compare the stats for third world nations. Most rapes in the US & UK are committed by Blacks and Hispanics . It is widely known .

You know Russia encompases more than just "ethnic Russian" lands right? Right?

Talking about Russian native lands. Isn't this just Moscow and it's suburbs? Rome and Romans comes to mind. Russia was known to be good at incorporating new territories with their people in their empire since like... forever.Russification and colonization was widely practiced. For example my nation failed miserably when it came to keeping lands and now have only small percent of what was back in the days, from Balic to Black sea. So really I have to give kudos to Russia in keeping such wast lands.

Regular wrote:Talking about Russian native lands. Isn't this just Moscow and it's suburbs? Rome and Romans comes to mind. Russia was known to be good at incorporating new territories with their people in their empire since like... forever.Russification and colonization was widely practiced. For example my nation failed miserably when it came to keeping lands and now have only small percent of what was back in the days, from Balic to Black sea.

Russian native lands you can say are from Lake Ladoga and Ustyug down to Kharkov, from Pskov to Murom and YaroslavlLater on you had colonisation of other lands, sometimes with native peoples that were gradually assimilated; Karelia & Kola Peninsula, other Arctic regions further East along the White Sea, much land further East and South along the Volga river, Urals, Kuban, Stavropol, Crimea, Astrakhan, Siberia, Far East, etc... so one can count all these places as native lands of ethnic Russians today.

Well under normal circumstances, that would never be the 1st choice would it.

But desperate events call for desperate measures.

I'm guessing you are part Ingush Muslim (or atleast sympathetic to them, for some reason) - because of your relucance to accept what States are sometimes forced to do in desperate times.

Terrorism ie the slaughter of innocent men, women and children, targetting economic collapse, mass importation of heroin, mass fraud and intimidation, eventually these call for desperate measures.Desperate measures that are the "least unfavourable" and therefore actually the best.

Should Chechen fanatics kick Christian Russians out of their homes, because they have no interest in law, goodwill, morality or fair play? Or should the State kick fanatics out of their homes as a last, reluctant and desperate measure?

And there are similar problems developing elsewhere. In France, Sweden, England etc.

Regular wrote:I was just wondering.. Instead of attacking melon selling immigrants, why not to target those Chechens, Dagestani mafioso who build castles around Moscow with their drug money?

They might appear to be simple melon sellers. But you'd be surprised. Irish, Muslims, Basques, terrorism involves more than a bomb going off twice a year. It permeates whole immigrant communities. Taxi drivers with smuggled fuel. Market stalls and kiosks washing money/dealing in counterfeit goods etc. Mosques etc washing money. Without going into the details, I've seen some of it. They'll be boasting openly about such and such person is connected with a particular terrrist group.

If someone "benefits" from terrorism, then he is part of the problem. Once immigrants/ethnic factions learn that there is nothing to gain by supporting their superiors in crime and terrorism, the chains can be broken.

Somehow I doubt most Chechens participate in terrorism whether directly or indirectly.

They are more busy rebuilding their homes, making a living and raising families like everyone else.

When you put a people in a desperate situation e.g. the Palestinians, they will resort to desperate measures, idealize terrorist leaders such as Arafat as national leaders & icons, propaganda would be rampant and opinions to the contrary of the mainstream would be rarely publicly expressed albeit they would still be there.

That's pretty much what happened to the Chechens too (and before them other peoples in the USSR such as Baltic states and so on); now that the situation has normalised to a great deal - civil society is going to start working and crime, support for armed rebellion, etc... is going to tank.

flamming_python wrote:Somehow I doubt most Chechens participate in terrorism whether directly or indirectly.

They are more busy rebuilding their homes, making a living and raising families like everyone else.

When you put a people in a desperate situation e.g. the Palestinians, they will resort to desperate measures, idealize terrorist leaders such as Arafat as national leaders & icons, propaganda would be rampant and opinions to the contrary of the mainstream would be rarely publicly expressed albeit they would still be there.

That's pretty much what happened to the Chechens too (and before them other peoples in the USSR such as Baltic states and so on); now that the situation has normalised to a great deal - civil society is going to start working and crime, support for armed rebellion, etc... is going to tank.

Well 1stly, look how many Russians were killed in the Chechen wars. Look how many Chechen combatants there were. That hardly suggests that the terror group was a tiny, inconsequential fringe group does it? This lot fought for a long time against a powerful, even if dated, super-army.

2nd, terrorism isn't just the black widow strapped with explosives. Its the heroin importer, the money washers, the people traffickers etc etc. Many places around the World, the economy chooses to be a black one. Everything is managed by hard core leaders of terrorism. I've actually spoken to these types of people. Utterly smug in their actions, often considering themselves above the law. These are terrorists as much as the black widow. They choose the black economy, not because they have to. But because of spite and hatred and bigotry.

3rd, you say "making a living". But unfortunately "making a living" can mean supporting terrorist enterprises. Even if its something as simple as buying fuel without the excise paid.

4th the Chechen wars didnt happen because Yeltsin was being harsh. It was because of the complete opposite. He was a corrupt idiot, to busy drinking vodka, screwing his citizens, helping oligarchs and pinching female politicians behinds. Terrorists dont respect weakness. They are bullies, they thrive on it. And unfortunately they did.

The terrorists view is that the Caucuses are inching towards independence by a policy of low key ethnic cleansing. Exploit weakness, and that process is accelerated. Why give terrorists special economic support? Why give them a top football team like Anzhi, skyscraper filled cities? Decent law abiding citizens across Russia dont get that. Why should terrorism give them special privileges. Its not right, its not fair. And ultimately it wont defeat terror. It will only support it.

And ofcourse, unlike some here, Im not saying that all Muslims are terrorists. However, I do think we are forced to consider terrorism as a series of levels. And that Muslim communities must share responsibility, not just the black widow with the bomb.

Firebird wrote:If someone "benefits" from terrorism, then he is part of the problem. Once immigrants/ethnic factions learn that there is nothing to gain by supporting their superiors in crime and terrorism, the chains can be broken.

If your British ancestors would have felt the same way you do, the world would have been spared a lot of agony.

Regular wrote:I was just wondering.. Instead of attacking melon selling immigrants, why not to target those Chechens, Dagestani mafioso who build castles around Moscow with their drug money?

They might appear to be simple melon sellers. But you'd be surprised. Irish, Muslims, Basques, terrorism involves more than a bomb going off twice a year. It permeates whole immigrant communities. Taxi drivers with smuggled fuel. Market stalls and kiosks washing money/dealing in counterfeit goods etc. Mosques etc washing money. Without going into the details, I've seen some of it. They'll be boasting openly about such and such person is connected with a particular terrrist group.

If someone "benefits" from terrorism, then he is part of the problem. Once immigrants/ethnic factions learn that there is nothing to gain by supporting their superiors in crime and terrorism, the chains can be broken.

You are dead on. I reside at Northern Ireland at the moment and seen things You've mentioned. Smuggled fuel here is Red diesel used for farming. Most taxis drive on it. Some Irish threatened me with pipe bombs and mentioned names of people they know. Even my superior who works in IT is openly telling me of his "adventures" in Troubles. Catholics and protestants, all of them have fools living in the past.But still it would be more wise to mob up and go straight to core of the problem - Mafia men living in the mansions. They are main supporters of destabilization, terrorism and crimes.

Regular wrote: You are dead on. I reside at Northern Ireland at the moment and seen things You've mentioned. Smuggled fuel here is Red diesel used for farming. Most taxis drive on it. Some Irish threatened me with pipe bombs and mentioned names of people they know. Even my superior who works in IT is openly telling me of his "adventures" in Troubles. Catholics and protestants, all of them have fools living in the past.But still it would be more wise to mob up and go straight to core of the problem - Mafia men living in the mansions. They are main supporters of destabilization, terrorism and crimes.

Thankyou : ) I've seen both sides with the Protestants and Catholic side. Alot of the time the threats of violence are bullshit from them (or "blarney" as the Irish phrase goes). However, its staggering to see how the different levels are all connected up to the higher chains of command. When one of them has a "business proposal" ie of the criminal variety, capital quickly finds its way down. I'm sure its exactly the same with Chechens, Dagestanis and the like. But ultimately, it just causes harm as a place to do business and as a place to live.

I know one guy who was very pro Republican. He was fine with me. A relative said to him "be careful what you wish for" - pointing to all the mansions on the *Republican* side of the border - financed by diesel/alcohol and all the other scams and extortion. In other words, crime and profits flourish in a state of disorder... or worse, in terrorist climates. The IRA and Loyalists would be getting more for a "great struggle" political or otherwise. But in reality, it could just as easily be going towards a new Bentley/mansion as it could be towards "struggle against oppression".

The Americans were incredibly successful at making membership of the Mafia a criminal offence. Or even associating with it. I think this would be a good way of cutting off the lifeblood of terror groups in the Caucuses etc.